File
Thomas J1,2, Bulley C1, McVey N3
1Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 2NHS Fife, Dunfermline, United Kingdom, 3NHS England, London, United Kingdom
Background: Tweetchats are becoming a recognised method of engaging in continuing professional development (CPD). Previous research demonstrated that participants in a Physiotalk tweetchat valued the connectedness and the constructive change gained from participation. The phenomenon of 'lurking' on social media has long been recognised but there is little research examining the impact lurking may have on health care professionals CPD. Lurking is defined as watching a tweetchat in real time or reading tweets or a transcript after the chat, but not posting tweets during the chat.
Purpose: This study aimed to explore experiences and views of lurkers in a specific online twitter community in relation to continuing professional development.
Methods: Ethical approval was granted for a two-stage mixed methods study to explore perceived impacts of ´lurking´ during a tweetchat on participants´ CPD. This reports the initial online survey incorporating open and closed questions developed from previous qualitative findings. Advertisements via Twitter and the physiotalk website led to 44 complete responses from people who identified with the definition of 'lurker'. Descriptive statistics were generated for closed questions and themes generated from open responses.
Results: Survey respondents were 77.3% female with 40.9% aged 41-60y. Most were from the UK (68.2%), although there was representation from most global regions. Most respondents chose to look at the tweets after, rather than during, organised tweetchats (54.5%), often due to being in a different time zone and availability during a chat. Over half (51.2%) engaged at least monthly, with a key motivation described as the tweetchat topic.
52.2% felt at least ´somewhat´ part of the community and 76.7% thought it allowed connections with other physiotherapists internationally, for example through following new people, especially experts, on Twitter. Whilst 52.3% of respondents reported using Physiotalk very little or not at all to access CPD, 75% responded that participation had prompted them to research a topic further, 81.8% said it had added to their knowledge and 65.9% said it had changed their views on a topic to a certain extent. The most prominent emerging theme was that using Physiotalk broadened respondents' views on a topic, and they felt it helped them stay ´up to date´. Students reported that it enabled a window into the world of working practice.
Conclusion(s): The response rate was low, illustrating the hard-to-reach nature of people identifying as lurkers in the physiotalk community. Most of the respondents would not be classed as digital natives, defined as an individual who was born after the widespread adoption of digital technology.
Most responses could be mapped to the explanatory theory developed for more active participants in a tweetchat, suggesting that lurkers derived similar broad outcomes to 'tweeting' participants. Novel emerging themes were linked to barriers to more active participation that contributed to lurking, including availability, time zones, and the fast paced nature of chats being a barrier to participation.
Implications: Lurkers in a social media community can derive similar benefits to active participants.
Keywords: Twitter, CPD
Funding acknowledgements: None
Purpose: This study aimed to explore experiences and views of lurkers in a specific online twitter community in relation to continuing professional development.
Methods: Ethical approval was granted for a two-stage mixed methods study to explore perceived impacts of ´lurking´ during a tweetchat on participants´ CPD. This reports the initial online survey incorporating open and closed questions developed from previous qualitative findings. Advertisements via Twitter and the physiotalk website led to 44 complete responses from people who identified with the definition of 'lurker'. Descriptive statistics were generated for closed questions and themes generated from open responses.
Results: Survey respondents were 77.3% female with 40.9% aged 41-60y. Most were from the UK (68.2%), although there was representation from most global regions. Most respondents chose to look at the tweets after, rather than during, organised tweetchats (54.5%), often due to being in a different time zone and availability during a chat. Over half (51.2%) engaged at least monthly, with a key motivation described as the tweetchat topic.
52.2% felt at least ´somewhat´ part of the community and 76.7% thought it allowed connections with other physiotherapists internationally, for example through following new people, especially experts, on Twitter. Whilst 52.3% of respondents reported using Physiotalk very little or not at all to access CPD, 75% responded that participation had prompted them to research a topic further, 81.8% said it had added to their knowledge and 65.9% said it had changed their views on a topic to a certain extent. The most prominent emerging theme was that using Physiotalk broadened respondents' views on a topic, and they felt it helped them stay ´up to date´. Students reported that it enabled a window into the world of working practice.
Conclusion(s): The response rate was low, illustrating the hard-to-reach nature of people identifying as lurkers in the physiotalk community. Most of the respondents would not be classed as digital natives, defined as an individual who was born after the widespread adoption of digital technology.
Most responses could be mapped to the explanatory theory developed for more active participants in a tweetchat, suggesting that lurkers derived similar broad outcomes to 'tweeting' participants. Novel emerging themes were linked to barriers to more active participation that contributed to lurking, including availability, time zones, and the fast paced nature of chats being a barrier to participation.
Implications: Lurkers in a social media community can derive similar benefits to active participants.
Keywords: Twitter, CPD
Funding acknowledgements: None
Topic: Education; Information management, technology & big data
Ethics approval required: Yes
Institution: Queen Margaret University
Ethics committee: Queen Margaret University ethics committee
Ethics number: REP0176
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
